R.R. College Of Veterinary And ... vs State Of Rajasthan
2021 Latest Caselaw 969 Raj/2

       HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                   BENCH AT JAIPUR

             S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6017/2020

R.R. College Of Veterinary And Animal Science, Deoli, Distt. Tonk
Through Dinesh Agrawal S/o Shri Ramesh Chand Agrawal, Aged
About 48 Years, Chairman, Micro Vision Society, 36, Saket
Colony, Deoli, Distt. Tonk.
                                                                   ----Petitioner
                                    Versus
1.     State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Animal
       Husbandry Department, Government Secretariat, Jaipur.
2.     Assistant    Secretary,       Animal        Husbandry       Department,
       Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.
                                                                ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)        :     Mr.Lokesh Kumar Sharma, Adv. along
                               with Mr.Laxmikant Malpura, Adv.
For Respondent(s)        :     Ms.Sheetal Mirdha, Addl. Advocate
                               General along with Mr.Prateek Singh,
                               Adv.


         HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR GAUR
                                   ORDER
Judgment Reserved on :                 15th January, 2021

Date of Order                  :       30th January, 2021

By the Court:

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner-College for

seeking a direction to issue requisite No Objection Certificate

(hereinafter shall be referred to as 'NOC') in Format-II, as per the

provisions contained in the Veterinary Council of India (Procedure

For Recognition and De-Recognition Of Veterinary Colleges And

Veterinary Qualifications) Rules, 2017 (hereinafter shall be

referred to as 'the VCI Rules, 2017'). The petitioner-College

further prays to allow them to conduct teaching of Bachelor of

Veterinary Science and Animal Husbandry Degree Course in their

(2 of 16) [CW-6017/2020]

College. The petitioner-College, in furtherance of above two

prayers, has sought permission to conduct requisite process of

admission to B.V.Sc and A.H.Degree Course (Session 2020-21) in

pursuance of the notification dated 11.05.2020, issued by the

Rajasthan University of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, Bikaner

for Rajasthan Pre-Veterinary Test (hereinafter shall be referred to

as 'the RPVT-2020').

2. The facts, in nutshell, as pleaded in the petition are that the

petitioner claims to be a College run by a registered society under

the Rajasthan Societies Registration Act, 1958 - registered on

30.05.2007. The petitioner-College has pleaded that it was eligible

to apply for recognition of Veterinary College, as per the

notification dated 19.05.2017, issued by the Ministry of

Agriculture and Farmers Welfare (Department of Animal

Husbandry, Dairying and Fisheries), Government of India, New

Delhi. The petitioner-College has further pleaded that it was

eligible for issuance of NOC, as per the provisions contained in

Rule 4 of the VCI Rules, 2017, as it had applied before the State

Government to issue NOC to run the Veterinary and Animal

Science College.

3. The petitioner-College has pleaded that the Department of

Animal Husbandry, Government of Rajasthan had issued a letter

dated 13.11.2017 with certain directions. The said letter had

communicated that the petitioner-College since intended to

establish a College, Government of Rajasthan had initially issued

NOC dated 03.09.2007 and the said NOC was extended by letter

dated 21.02.2014 till 21.02.2016. The letter dated 13.11.2017

(3 of 16) [CW-6017/2020]

further extended the NOC for a period of two years with the

condition that the petitioner-College was to start College after

completing all the formalities/requirements to run a Veterinary

College.

4. The petitioner-College has pleaded that vide letter dated

30.08.2018 they communicated to the Secretary, Department of

Animal Husbandry, Dairying and Fisheries, Ministry of Agriculture

and Farmers Welfare, New Delhi that the petitioner-College after

seeking NOC from the Government of Rajasthan was planning to

start R.R. College of Veterinary and Animal Sciences in Deoli,

District Tonk. The petitioner-College for recognition of its College

also submitted an application in the prescribed Format-I along

with all the required documents and also enclosed a Demand Draft

amounting to Rs.1.5 Lakhs drawn in favour of Veterinary Council

of India payable at New Delhi.

5. The petitioner-College has further pleaded that the Central

Government by letter dated 21.09.2018 informed the petitioner-

College that they have not submitted the essentiality certificate

from the State Government (Form-III) and consent of affiliation

from the University for opening of New Veterinary College (Form-

IV).

6. The petitioner-College has pleaded that the State

Government issued letter dated 05.04.2019 to the Director,

Animal Husbandry Department and Animal Sciences, Bikaner,

regarding NOC and essentiality certificate, sought by the

petitioner-College in Form-II and Form-III. The petitioner-College

has further pleaded that the Department of Animal Husbandry,

(4 of 16) [CW-6017/2020]

Government of Rajasthan issued essentiality certificate on

11.06.2019 to the petitioner-College.

7. The petitioner-College has further pleaded that vide letter

dated 30.08.2019 the Registrar, Rajasthan University of Veterinary

and Animal Sciences, Bikaner had informed the Assistant

Commissioner (AH), Department of Animal Husbandry, Dairying

and Fisheries, Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers Welfare, New

Delhi that as per the inspection report, the University had agreed

to affiliate the R.R. College of Veterinary and Animal Sciences,

Deoli, District Tonk subject to inclusion of the Veterinary College or

the Veterinary Qualification (Bachelor of Veterinary Science and

Animal Husbandry/Bachelor of Veterinary Science), to be awarded

by the University to the students, by the Central Government.

8. The petitioner-College has pleaded that vide letter dated

29.08.2019 a request was made by them to the Secretary,

Department of Animal Husbandry, Dairying and Fisheries, Ministry

of Agriculture and Farmers Welfare, New Delhi enclosing

essentiality certificate, issued by the Government of Rajasthan as

well as the consent of affiliation from Rajasthan University of

Veterinary and Animal Sciences, Bikaner for opening of R.R.

College of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, Deoli, District Tonk.

The petitioner-College is said to have requested in the said letter

to consider the proposal and depute a team for inspection so that

accreditation could be accorded at the earliest.

9. The petitioner-College has further pleaded that the

Government of India vide letter dated 30.10.2019 communicated

that as per Rule 7 of VCI Rules, 2017, the application in Form-I for

(5 of 16) [CW-6017/2020]

opening the Veterinary College was sent to the Veterinary Council

of India for their scrutiny and recommendation. The application in

Form-I, along with the enclosures, were examined in the office of

the Council and certain deficiencies were found in the documents.

The letter of Veterinary Council of India, pointing out deficiencies

in the application form, was also enclosed and at serial No.4 in the

application Form-I, in the list of enclosures, NOC from the State

Government was not enclosed by the petitioner-College in the

prescribed Form-II of the VCI Rules, 2017.

10. The petitioner-College has further pleaded that they vide

letters dated 14.08.2018 and 31.10.2019 requested the State

Government to issue NOC and essentiality certificate in prescribed

Form-II of the VCI Rules, 2017 and also prayed to revise and issue

the provisional NOC. The petitioner-College has further pleaded

that when no action was taken by the State Government on the

request made by them to issue NOC in the prescribed Format

(Form-II), they again wrote a letter dated 24.01.2020 in this

regard. The petitioner-College had pleaded that it has invested a

huge amount and has developed the requisite infrastructure to

establish the College of Veterinary and Animal Sciences and as per

the provisions contained in the VCI Rules, 2017, they are fully

qualified for teaching of Bachelor of Veterinary Science and Animal

Husbandry Degree Course but only on account of non-issuance of

the requisite NOC and essentiality certificate in format (Form-II),

they were not permitted to participate in the admission process,

as conducted by the Rajasthan University of Veterinary and Animal

Sciences, Bikaner for the RPVT, 2020 for Session 2020-21. The

(6 of 16) [CW-6017/2020]

petitioner-College has placed on record the notification dated

11.05.2020 issued for RPVT, 2020 and further said to have sent a

notice for demand of justice dated 13.05.2020 before filing of the

present writ petition.

11. The submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner-College

are as follows:-

(i) The non-issuance of NOC in format (Form-II) to the

petitioner-College by the State Government in spite of

fulfilling all the conditions by them to run the College, as per

the provisions contained in the VCI Rules, 2017, is arbitrary

and illegal.

(ii) The petitioner-College after investing a huge amount

and developing the infrastructure to establish the College of

Veterinary and Animal Sciences, as per the provisions

contained in the VCI Rules, 2017, cannot be deprived to

impart education (Bachelor of Veterinary Science and Animal

Husbandry Degree Course) and by not permitting the

petitioner-College to participate in the admission process for

the Session 2020-21, the fundamental right of the

petitioner-College to run the educational institution has been

denied without any justification.

12. The respondents have filed reply to the writ petition and

have pleaded that the petitioner-College had submitted an

application in the year 2007, seeking NOC for opening the College

imparting Veterinary Courses for the Session 2006-07 and

considering the said application, the respondent-Department

issued NOC to the petitioner-College dated 03.09.2007 and on the

(7 of 16) [CW-6017/2020]

request made by the petitioner-College, the NOC which was issued

for two years, was extended till 21.02.2016.

13. The respondents have further pleaded that subsequently in

the year 2017, the petitioner-College requested again for issuance

of NOC and the Department vide order dated 13.11.2017

extended the NOC for a period of two years i.e. till 12.11.2019.

14. The respondents have pleaded that the petitioner-College till

filing of the petition had not taken any step for renewal of NOC, as

the same has lapsed on 12.11.2019 and in absence of any fresh

NOC, the respondent-State could not have issued NOC in the

format, required as per the VCI Rules, 2017.

15. The respondents have further pleaded that ever since the

issuance of NOC in the year 2007, the petitioner-College instead

of making efforts to establish the College and make it functional,

sat over the matter and in a routine manner sought extensions of

NOC from time to time. The respondents have further pleaded that

the petitioner-College was first required to apply for fresh NOC

and only on acquiring the same, the NOC could be issued in the

format, as prescribed by the Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers

Welfare, Government of India, New Delhi.

16. This Court, during the course of hearing, directed to file an

affidavit by the responsible Officer of the respondent-Department

with regard to steps being taken by the State Government after

receiving the application of the petitioner-College for the purpose

of grant of NOC in the prescribed format.

17. In pursuance of the Court's direction, the additional affidavit

has been filed by the Joint Secretary to the Government,

(8 of 16) [CW-6017/2020]

Department of Animal Husbandry, Jaipur. The additional affidavit

mentions the fact about issuing essentiality certificate to the

petitioner-College on 11.06.2019. It further states that after the

petitioner-College submitted the essentiality certificate before the

Veterinary Council of India, the Veterinary Council of India vide its

communication dated 30.10.2019 directed the petitioner-College

to submit NOC in the prescribed format (Form-II) and on receiving

the said communication from the Veterinary Council of India, the

petitioner-College vide letter dated 31.10.2019 for the first time

requested the Department of Animal Husbandry to issue NOC in

prescribed format (Form-II) and the said communication was

received by the respondent on 07.11.2019 i.e. five days before

expiry of NOC on 12.11.2019, issued to the petitioner-College by

the State Government.

18. The stand of State Government is that no application seeking

extension of NOC was submitted by the petitioner-College prior to

expiry of earlier NOC, issued to them and the said earlier NOC has

already expired on 12.11.2019 and if the petitioner-College is

desirous of seeking NOC in the prescribed Format, from the State

Government, then a fresh application is required to be filed by

them, as per the circular dated 12.10.2020 and in case the

petitioner-College files such an application seeking NOC, then the

same is required to be considered at the level of Chief Minister's

Office.

19. The additional affidavit states that in regard to the

contention of the petitioner-College that the Department's own

communications reflect that the petitioner-College had sought

(9 of 16) [CW-6017/2020]

NOC in Form-II from the Department, the Department has taken a

stand that mentioning of Form-II in the communications dated

31.12.2018, 28.02.2019, 05.04.2019 and 11.04.2019 was an

inadvertent error and no such document exists indicating that the

petitioner-College had ever sought NOC in the prescribed format.

The additional affidavit further states that for the first time the

petitioner-College sought for issuance of NOC in the prescribed

format (Form-II) vide communication dated 31.10.2019 and the

petitioner-College cannot be permitted to base their entire case on

the inadvertent error crept in these communications.

20. The petitioner-College has also filed counter-affidavit and

stated that they have submitted an application on 14.08.2018 and

thereafter proceedings were initiated by the respondent-

Department, as evident from the note-sheet dated 12.09.2018

wherein the petitioner-College is said to have demanded

essentiality certificate and NOC from the Department for

accreditation of their College. The petitioner-College has further

stated in the said counter-affidavit that copy of note-sheet dated

12.09.2018 has been obtained by them under the Right to

Information Act and perusal of the same would reflect that time

and again Deputy Secretary to the Government, Department of

Animal Husbandry had written for issuance of NOC and

essentiality certificate to the petitioner-College in the prescribed

formats i.e. Form-II and Form-III respectively.

21. The petitioner-College further reiterate in their counter-

affidavit that essentiality certificate was issued in Format (Form-

III) on 11.06.2019 and for the purpose of issuing NOC, the

(10 of 16) [CW-6017/2020]

Director, Department of Animal Husbandry vide letter dated

03.03.2020 constituted a Committee for carrying out re-inspection

with regard to issuance of NOC in Format (Form-II) and the

inspection was conducted by the said Committee on 06.03.2020

and thereafter the State Government did not take any action and

the matter was kept pending resulting into denial to the

petitioner-College for issuance of NOC in the prescribed Form-II.

22. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the

petitioner-College cannot be made to suffer only on account of

inaction by the respondents. Learned counsel further submitted

that if there was no coordination between different Authorities for

issuing NOC in Format (Form-II) the petitioner-College cannot be

made liable for the same. He further submitted that various note-

sheets, filed before this Court, clearly make out a case that the

petitioner-College had applied for issuance of NOC in format

(Form-II) as back as in August, 2018 and the State Government in

spite of issuing essentiality certificate, deprived the petitioner-

College to participate in the admission process for the Session

2020-21 for Graduate Course (Bachelor of Veterinary Science and

Animal Husbandry).

23. Learned counsel further submitted that the requisite

inspections were carried out for issuance of NOC and the State

Government is required to issue NOC in format (Form-II) to the

petitioner-College and they cannot be now permitted to take

resort to the recent circular, issued by them on 12.10.2020,

providing for consideration of application at the level of Chief

Minister's Office.

(11 of 16) [CW-6017/2020]

24. Ms.Sheetal Mirdha, Additional Advocate General submitted

that the petitioner-College cannot be granted any relief as they

failed to apply for extension of NOC before 12.11.2019 and if the

petitioner-College fulfills the parameters for issuance of NOC, they

are always free to apply afresh and the Authorities can consider

such application, as per the prevalent Rules and the requirement

of law, as contained in the circular dated 12.10.2020.

25. This Court is primarily required to consider right of the

petitioner-College for issuance of NOC in the prescribed format

(Form-II), as per the requirement, contained in the Rule 4 of the

VCI Rules, 2017.

26. This Court finds that the petitioner-College was issued NOC

in the year 2007 and further extensions were granted from time to

time and in the last extension, granted to the petitioner-College,

the State Government directed the petitioner-College to complete

all the formalities for starting the College within a period of two

years i.e. up to 12.11.2019.

27. This is an admitted case of both the parties that from 2007

till filing of the present writ petition, the petitioner-College had not

started its College and as such, the NOC, which was issued only

remained a paper formality.

28. This Court finds that the petitioner-College had applied for

starting the College, as per the requirements contained in VCI

Rules, 2017 and the communication dated 30.10.2019 was issued

to the petitioner-College by the Government of India whereby the

NOC from the State Government was not enclosed in the

prescribed format (Form-II) of the VCI Rules, 2017.

                                             (12 of 16)                     [CW-6017/2020]


29.   The      petitioner-College        has     submitted           a     letter   dated

31.10.2019 wherein request was made that as per the letter of

Veterinary Council of India dated 31.10.2019, the State

Government is required to issue NOC in format (Form-II).

30. The submission of learned counsel for the petitioner-College

that vide order dated 14.08.2018 they had requested to issue the

essentiality certificate and NOC for Veterinary College, this Court

finds that the said letter mentions about NOC in favour of the

petitioner-College issued upto 31.11.2017 and further asked for

essentiality certificate and NOC from the Government for

accreditation of the College from the Veterinary Council of India.

The prayer made in the said letter specifically asks for issuance of

essentiality certificate and not of NOC in form-II.

31. This Court further finds that the petitioner-College has

specifically pleaded in the writ petition that they had applied for

the first time before the Government of India by writing a letter on

30.08.2018 (Annexure-4) seeking recognition of new Veterinary

College. This Court finds that when the petitioner-College itself

has requested the Central Government for recognition on

30.08.2018, there did not arise any question of seeking NOC in

Form-II from the State Government by writing letter dated

14.08.2018.

32. The submission of learned counsel for the petitioner-College

that various letters issued by the State Government dated

31.12.2018, 05.04.2019, 11.04.2019, 12.04.2019 and 15.04.2019

clearly establish that case of the petitioner-College for issuance of

NOC in format (Form-II) was pending consideration at the level of

(13 of 16) [CW-6017/2020]

State Government and as such, the State Government completely

failed to discharge its duty, this Court finds that the letters issued

containing the subject matter of issuance of NOC and essentiality

certificate to the petitioner-College but the Authorities had taken

steps only to issue essentiality certificate to the petitioner-College,

which was ultimately issued on 11.06.2019.

33. This Court finds that the petitioner-College was also required

to obtain NOC in the prescribed format (Form-II) from the State

Government and such NOC was demanded by the petitioner-

College by writing a letter dated 31.10.2019, received by the

Department on 07.11.2019 i.e. five days prior to expiry of NOC on

12.11.2019, it cannot be said that the State Government failed to

issue NOC to the petitioner-College in the prescribed format

(Form-II).

34. This Court further finds that the petitioner-College had not

filed any application for seeking extension of NOC prior to expiry

of earlier NOC on 12.11.2019 and as such, it cannot be presumed

that only by making a reference of certain letters, issued by the

State Government, the case of the petitioner-College was required

to be considered for issuance of NOC in the prescribed format

(Form-II).

35. The submission of learned counsel for the petitioner that the

note-sheet dated 12.09.2018, filed along with their counter-

affidavit, clearly reflects that matter of issuance of NOC in the

prescribed format (Form-II) was sub-judice before the State

Government since August, 2018, suffice it to say that the said

note-sheet does not confer any right on any person to claim that a

(14 of 16) [CW-6017/2020]

decision has been taken by any Authority while recording the

proceedings in the said note-sheet until final order is not

communicated to the person concerned. The Apex Court in the

case of Sethi Auto Service Station & Anr. Vs. Delhi

Development Authority & Ors. reported in (2009) 1 SCC 180

has clearly held that the note-sheets do not form or substitute any

order and no right can be claimed on the basis of such note-sheet.

The extract of para-14 of the judgment, being relevant for the

present purpose, is reproduced as under:-

"14. It is trite to state that notings in a departmental file do not have the sanction of law to be an effective order. A noting by an officer is an expression of his viewpoint on the subject. It is no more than an opinion by an officer for internal use and consideration of the other officials of the department and for the benefit of the final decision-making authority. Needless to add that internal notings are not meant for outside exposure. Notings in the file culminate into an executable order, affecting the rights of the parties, only when it reaches the final decision-making authority in the department; gets his approval and the final order is communicated to the person concerned."

36. The Apex Court, while dealing with somewhat similar issue,

held in the case of Shanti Sports Club & Anr. Vs. UOI & Ors.

reported in (2009) 15 SCC 705, as follows:-

"43. A noting recorded in the file is merely a noting simpliciter and nothing more. It merely represents expression of opinion by the particular individual. By no stretch of imagination, such noting can be treated as a decision of the Government. Even if the competent authority records its opinion in the file on the merits of the matter under consideration, the same cannot be termed as a decision of the Government unless it is sanctified and acted upon by issuing an order in accordance with Article 77(1) and (2) or Article 166(1) and (2). The noting in the file or even a decision gets culminated into an order affecting right of the parties only when it is expressed in the name of the President or the Governor, as the case may be, and authenticated in the manner provided in Article 77(2) or Article 166(2). A noting or even a decision recorded in the file can always be reviewed/reversed/overruled or overturned and the court cannot take cognizance of the

(15 of 16) [CW-6017/2020]

earlier noting or decision for exercise of the power of judicial review.

52. As a result of the above discussion, we hold that the noting recorded in the official files by the officers of the Government at different levels and even the Ministers do not become decision of the Government unless the same is sanctified and acted upon by issuing an order in the name of the President or Governor, as the case may, authenticated in the manner provided in Articles 77(2) and 166(2) and is communicated to the affected persons. The notings and/or decisions recorded in the file do not confer any right or adversely affect the right of any person and the same can neither be challenged in a court nor made basis for seeking relief. Even if the competent authority records noting in the file, which indicates that some decision has been taken by the concerned authority, the same can always be reviewed by the same authority or reversed or over-turned or overruled by higher functionary/authority in the Government."

37. This Court finds that the additional affidavit specifically

states that mentioning of Form-II in communications dated

31.12.2018, 28.02.2019, 05.04.2019 and 11.04.2019 was an

inadvertent error and this Court does not have any reason to

disbelieve that the respondent-Department was dealing with

issuance of NOC in the prescribed format (Form-II) while issuing

these communications.

38. This Court further finds that the petitioner-College has not

placed on record any communication/letter seeking NOC in the

prescribed format (Form-II), except their communication dated

31.10.2019. The petitioner-College was required to be vigilant and

when the Veterinary Council of India informed them vide

communication dated 30.10.2019 that they have not submitted

NOC in the prescribed format (Form-II), the petitioner-College on

31.10.2019, for the first time, made the communication to the

respondent-State Authorities for grant of NOC in the prescribed

format (Form-II).

(16 of 16) [CW-6017/2020]

39. This Court finds that the petitioner-College also failed to seek

extension of NOC, prior to applying for accreditation of their

College before the Veterinary Council of India and the last NOC

granted by the State Government in favour of the petitioner-

College from 2007 also lapsed on 12.11.2019.

40. This Court finds that the Authorities which are dealing with

the case of the petitioner-College should have been careful and

prudent while considering the case for issuance of essentiality

certificate or NOC in the prescribed format (Form-II). The issuance

of certain orders and drawing of certain note-sheets have created

false hope in the mind of the petitioner-College and as such this

Court does not approve such kind of act of the respondents,

however, the same would not result into any right being created in

favour of the petitioner-College for issuance of NOC with

retrospective effect.

41. This Court finds that if the petitioner-College fulfills the

requisite conditions for issuance of NOC in the prescribed format

(Form-II), they are always free to apply before the competent

authority, who is expected to consider such application in

accordance with the prevalent policy and parameters required for

grant of NOC in the prescribed format (Form-II).

42. The instant writ petition accordingly stands disposed of with

the aforesaid observations.

(ASHOK KUMAR GAUR),J

Solanki DS, PS

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)